Dividends, page-106

Its got nothing to do with economies of scale, its about unit costs but I won't bother explaining the difference.

You act as if the problems assoc with the movement of 4 trucks/min disappears if it is a Melb location & that it is a problem specific to NAG.

If PASS is taken to suburban locations its still 4 trucks/min but then its damaging suburban roads (Council costs) rather than Freeways (State Costs). Local Councils won't suffer that, and rather than 8 residence being dusturbed its probably more like 8,000 or 18,000 or more. Bit of a dumb arguement I'd say dbl, true to form though.

The NAGs Option minimises these issues. They are issues that are involved with all potential location, just less of an issue if NAGs is the destination. Thanks for bringing that up dbl.

Wow if thats the biggest problem you can come up with against NAGs, then it looks like NAGs is a shoe in.